Page 16 of 30 FirstFirst ... 612131415161718192026 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 292
  1. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
    My fear is that people will flock to this camera thinking that because it has a handle with an audio input, it will somehow be better than or a replacement for a proper cinema camera. You can see people saying that online already.

    I love mirrorless cameras and what they offer and use cameras like my A7SIII for B-cam shots all the time in my work. But, I hate seeing these young guys convince themselves that they are better tools for video than a proper cinema camera like the FX6 or FX9 simply because they are smaller and cheaper. They are not the same thing.

    I cannot find freelance shooters in my area to hire anymore who have anything other than a mirrorless camera or DSLR for video. Many don’t even own tripods these days. It’s insane!
    The rub is more about money/cost/wages than mirrorless vs "proper" imho. Is this for corporate work or film production? The pay scale often does not warrant buying a $6,000 + accessories on up camera for many people. How much are you willing to pay shooters to bring a $10,000 camera plus lenses along with them? Does it match your project budgets? I am not a fan of the term "cinema camera". Lets face it, there are good cameras and there are better cameras. They are all mirrorless with some level of sensor and inputs. It is more about professional vs semi-professional on down. It is tough to know what these categories are anymore as they used to be defined by experience which translated to large dollar investment into gear.

    So Sony comes out with a lower priced camera that produces very nice images. The whole balance is thrown off as experienced operators can make the new camera sing but prefer to use higher end gear. Newbies want the low barrier of entry model just to hang their shingle, but that image quality is still part of the package. It still comes back to dollars and what is experience worth?


    I can see your pain as somebody who owns a lot of gear and think of it as an extension of my business. But, I can say that I fall in to the category that I can not justify more than the cost of owning mirrorless cameras. The tech is changing so quickly that you take a risk buying something expensive and not being able to sell it for very much in a short time period.


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    384
    Default
    I'm talking more about the guys that drop $3,500 into a camera like the A7SIII, then go on to buy a set of Peter McKinnon Polar Pro ND filters for another $500, the K3M adaptor for audio for $600, a cage for another $400 just to get a top handle and places to mount your accessories, all just to have a camera that can do what a camera like the FX6 can do out of the box. By the time you spend that kind of money, you could've just bought the right video tool to begin with. Those same people then throw that camera on a monopod and call themselves a cinematographer.

    I get that the FX3 looks to eliminate the need to buy a cage by intergrading screw holes and adding a top handle and an audio adapter, but the cost is higher and you still have to have ND filters and by the time you add that, your photo camera is now back up to the cost nearly of a camera like the FX6. I just see this so often and it doesn't make sense to me.

    I want to hire guys who show up with a solid tripod and a camera that's built for video, not a camera that relies on 100 attachments for it to shoot video and a monopod. But that's what we have today because of the rise of YouTubers and "content creators" (my least favorite term).


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member scorsesefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Queens, New York
    Posts
    2,040
    Default
    Just not getting the appeal of the fx3. Maybe because I don't fly my cameras? Nor do I get the appeal of building out a dslr style camera as Joshua said. Cinema camera (fs/fx etc.) + mirrorless as b-cam is the way to go IMO. Plus, does anyone else besides me find the fx3 to be horribly ugly?


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    11,457
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
    I'm talking more about the guys that drop $3,500 into a camera like the A7SIII, then go on to buy a set of Peter McKinnon Polar Pro ND filters for another $500, the K3M adaptor for audio for $600, a cage for another $400 just to get a top handle and places to mount your accessories, all just to have a camera that can do what a camera like the FX6 can do out of the box. By the time you spend that kind of money, you could've just bought the right video tool to begin with. Those same people then throw that camera on a monopod and call themselves a cinematographer.

    I get that the FX3 looks to eliminate the need to buy a cage by intergrading screw holes and adding a top handle and an audio adapter, but the cost is higher and you still have to have ND filters and by the time you add that, your photo camera is now back up to the cost nearly of a camera like the FX6. I just see this so often and it doesn't make sense to me.

    I want to hire guys who show up with a solid tripod and a camera that's built for video, not a camera that relies on 100 attachments for it to shoot video and a monopod. But that's what we have today because of the rise of YouTubers and "content creators" (my least favorite term).
    I've been hiring shooters in other states quite a bit lately. I always tell them or the booker, "No mirrorless, DSLRs, I expect an FS7, C300 MKII or better camera..." period. It's not even always the camera, it's the talent of the shooter.
    Many people who only own mirrorless or a PCC 4K don't know how to shoot well, light, deal with clients, etc. at all. For me, the camera my hired shooter has is an indicator of being a pro and competent. Not every shooter who owns a
    pro camera is a pro, but a lot of people who only own mirrorless and DSLRS are NOT pros.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    1 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    11,457
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by scorsesefan View Post
    Just not getting the appeal of the fx3. Maybe because I don't fly my cameras? Nor do I get the appeal of building out a dslr style camera as Joshua said. Cinema camera (fs/fx etc.) + mirrorless as b-cam is the way to go IMO. Plus, does anyone else besides me find the fx3 to be horribly ugly?
    I built out one of my XT-3s with the whole shebang, cage, rods, FF, external battery, monitor. It's still a pretty terrible camera for handheld. Mirrorless and DSLR style cameras have gotten so good as far as image quality but ergonomically, they are too small and light to be a good video camera
    and everthing is in the wrong place for pro level shooting. Not saying it can't be done, just really the wrong tool. If you want all of that crap and hang it off of your tiny mirrorless, you likely bought the wrong tool and are now just putting wide wheels and fancy rims on your Civic. I probably should
    sell all of the junk I got for the X-T3, its a tripod/gimbal cam.
    Last edited by puredrifting; 02-22-2021 at 01:12 PM.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    384
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    I've been hiring shooters in other states quite a bit lately. I always tell them or the booker, "No mirrorless, DSLRs, I expect an FS7, C300 MKII or better camera..." period. It's not even always the camera, it's the talent of the shooter.
    Many people who only own mirrorless or a PCC 4K don't know how to shoot well, light, deal with clients, etc. at all. For me, the camera my hired shooter has is an indicator of being a pro and competent. Not every shooter who owns a
    pro camera is a pro, but a lot of people who only own mirrorless and DSLRS are NOT pros.
    I couldn't agree more.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Lausanne, Switzerland
    Posts
    209
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
    I'm talking more about the guys that drop $3,500 into a camera like the A7SIII, then go on to buy a set of Peter McKinnon Polar Pro ND filters for another $500, the K3M adaptor for audio for $600, a cage for another $400 just to get a top handle and places to mount your accessories, all just to have a camera that can do what a camera like the FX6 can do out of the box. By the time you spend that kind of money, you could've just bought the right video tool to begin with. Those same people then throw that camera on a monopod and call themselves a cinematographer.

    I get that the FX3 looks to eliminate the need to buy a cage by intergrading screw holes and adding a top handle and an audio adapter, but the cost is higher and you still have to have ND filters and by the time you add that, your photo camera is now back up to the cost nearly of a camera like the FX6. I just see this so often and it doesn't make sense to me.

    I want to hire guys who show up with a solid tripod and a camera that's built for video, not a camera that relies on 100 attachments for it to shoot video and a monopod. But that's what we have today because of the rise of YouTubers and "content creators" (my least favorite term).
    If the Fx6 had an EVF then it would be ready out of the box like the Fs5. Unfortunately it’s missing the one thing to be able to film in every light situation.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     

  9. Collapse Details
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member scorsesefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Queens, New York
    Posts
    2,040
    Default
    No S-Cinetone update yet for the A7SIII...


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 16 of 30 FirstFirst ... 612131415161718192026 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •